Separation of Church and State.

I am completely for it, but sadly America is far from the clutches of religions influence in government affairs. The main cause of this would be two points: 

One,
Certain running offices using religion to get votes, ie: The Republicants.

Two,
The people voting them in. The reason why I'm putting this up as a problem is quite simple, how can you have a country separate from religion when the majority of the people are Christian?

You may say that it is showing that this is simply what the people want but I disagree. If that was true then why have it in the first place? You can't have your cake and eat it too. True freedom needs to come with certain rules, if you have religious parties running, and doing so in a manipulative way ( knowing that people will vote for them because of that one religious stance rather then because of the party's main principles ) then America needs a new system, one that doesn't allow religious parties or at least a law system that will stand up to the true idea of separation of religion and state.

I often hear people saying things along the lines of "Take out "under God" out of the pledge of allegiance? Why, it's not hurting any one!" or "What's wrong with the Ten Commandments in court houses? They're the original rules! This has NOTHING to do with religion!" I often have to think, that's quite fine and all saying this, but your only saying it because you yourself are Christian and these things are positive in your personal agenda. What if it was the Hindu rules put up in court houses? Would you be saying the same things? What if it was "Under Allah" in the pledge of allegiance? I would have to think your opinion would change...

Here are some quotes that have made me quite sick;

"The Republic party... reaffirms the United States of America is a Christian Nation..." -GOP platform document 2002.

"God told me to strike at the Al-Qaida and I struck them, and then he told me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the middle east.." -George.W.Bush Jr.

"The 'wall of separation between church and state' is a metaphor based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide for judging. It should be frankly and explicitly abandoned." -Supreme Court Justice, William Relinquist.

This is a disgrace and is down falling the progress of humanity. I think the final nail will be creationism being taught in schools, as well as forced prayer. Why do you think America was created? One of the main reasons would be to escape England's religious tyranny and now it's just as bad, if not ( getting ) worse.

Edit: This topic is now debate about all countries and whether separation of state and church is a good/bad thing.

God, you're worse than bloody Jehovah Witness' who knock door to door Saucy...
You complain about religion in the same way people "advertise" religion - you constantly keep at it yet complain about the idea when religious people do it.

Wait. This is actually a decent topic.

Two,
The people voting them in. The reason why I'm putting this up as a problem is quite simple, how can you have a country separate from religion when the majority of the people are Christian?

Kill the Christians! (just kidding!)

America needs a new system, one that doesn't allow religious parties or at least a law system that will stand up to the true idea of separation of religion and state.

I think this quote alone may refute all my statements. And it does in a way... (left what I said in the post anyway - below).

I often hear people saying things along the lines of "Take out "under God" out of the pledge of allegiance? Why, it's not hurting any one!" or "What's wrong with the Ten Commandments in court houses? They're the original rules! This has NOTHING to do with religion!" I often have to think, that's quite fine and all saying this, but your only saying it because you yourself are Christian and these things are positive in your personal agenda. What if it was the Hindu rules put up in court houses? Would you be saying the same things? What if it was "Under Allah" in the pledge of allegiance? I would have to think your opinion would change...

Well... Ten Commandments are very basic and simple rules (ignoring the three religious ones), and there is nothing wrong with following them. We need rules to live in a safe environment. For example if we got rid of any rules on this forum it'd end up being a 'troll 'n' flame' forum. That said I personally think using them in a court house is quite fine - take into consideration the other method that is used:

I don't know if it has any special name/heading but here is how it works:
Every court case is recorded down, what happened, why there is a case and what is the conclusion (jail time, fine, whatever else there is) - this is used for future references to make fair jail times/fines and also to know how to deal with a case if it happens to arise again. I'm sure this is flawed somehow but it is better than: drown and you're innocent, swim and you're not (which results in burning to death of course).

For the "under God" part I am baffled. It ISN'T hurting anyone, and I'm not sure (never been to court) but if you are not religious you don't have to do it?

Interesting point you make about using another religion, not sure WHAT to say about that one.

"God told me to strike at the Al-Qaida and I struck them, and then he told me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the middle east.." -George.W.Bush Jr.

I think I'm going to throw up.... he's like the current anti-Christ (overexagerating obviously)...

This is a disgrace and is down falling the progress of humanity. I think the final nail will be creationism being taught in schools, as well as forced prayer. Why do you think America was created? One of the main reasons would be to escape England's religious tyranny and now it's just as bad, if not ( getting ) worse.

Um. DS, calm down!

I don't see how it is down falling the progress of humanity (and apparently I don't see a lot of things :/). And if you read that referring to the world then in some schools is probably is forced, albeit not a good system for that country religious-wise. However you are only referring to America - and if it's as free as I've heard then this will never happen. I can't picture it happening in Australia, because that's what religious schools are for.

God, you're worse than bloody Jehovah Witness' who knock door to door Saucy...
You complain about religion in the same way people "advertise" religion - you constantly keep at it yet complain about the idea when religious people do it.

This is a topic intended to incite debate, how can that happen unless I put my view points down as well..? Your calling me a hypocrite without reading what I'm actually saying or understanding it...

Interesting point you make about using another religion, not sure WHAT to say about that one.

That's because your only supporting the ideas because it's YOUR faith. Any other way and you would be screaming your lungs out.

I think I'm going to throw up.... he's like the current anti-Christ (overexagerating obviously)...

The President of America was saying that an entity spoke to him and told him to kill people. Enough said.

don't see how it is down falling the progress of humanity (and apparently I don't see a lot of things :/).

Because religion and most science clash. If they start teaching religion as truth in school, then people will stop looking for the real answers, or at least stop researching certain areas. When I said the downfall of humanity, it was cause.

However you are only referring to America - and if it's as free as I've heard then this will never happen. I can't picture it happening in Australia, because that's what religious schools are for.

Then I guess America's not as free as you think as it's more then a possibility and a very real idea. As to Australia: They already teach it in our schools, don't you have "RE" ( religious education ) classes..?

Interesting point you make about using another religion, not sure WHAT to say about that one.

That's because your only supporting the ideas because it's YOUR faith. Any other way and you would be screaming your lungs out.

I just don't get it Saucy. I'm not Christian, do you think anyone who argues/debates against you is Christian.

I think I'm going to throw up.... he's like the current anti-Christ (overexagerating obviously)...

The President of America was saying that an entity spoke to him and told him to kill people. Enough said.

He's just trying to gain popularity though. I see your point, don't worry - no need to make another topic about it.

As to Australia: They already teach it in our schools, don't you have "RE" ( religious education ) classes..?

Not where I live, in some schools they do (i.e. Catholic). But for public schools it can be optional if the students really WANTS 'RE'.

Your calling me a hypocrite without reading what I'm actually saying or understanding it...

I hope this doesn't offend you... not that you have a choice to be or not to be: you either will or won't...

I am calling you a hypocrite because you are being one. But what you're saying is sort of decent.

I just don't get it Saucy. I'm not Christian, do you think anyone who argues/debates against you is Christian.

Well you certainly give off the notion that you are. So what religion are you..?

He's just trying to gain popularity though. I see your point, don't worry - no need to make another topic about it.

What..? Are cheap shots all you have? If what your saying is true, then he's more manipulative and wrong then a man who is just "plain insane".

Not where I live, in some schools they do (i.e. Catholic). But for public schools it can be optional if the students really WANTS 'RE'.

Do you live in Australia?? I thought you did.

How optional can it be for a child? I was more then pressured to take those classes. Pressured from the teachers and students. They call it optional but children absorb things a lot easier then adults as they don't have the proper skills to debate things for them selves. Add in all religions to school rather then just the Christian faith and I wont complain.

I hope this doesn't offend you... not that you have a choice to be or not to be: you either will or won't...

I am calling you a hypocrite because you are being one. But what you're saying is sort of decent.

Rather then just calling me a hypocrite, how about you show some facts to back it up...?

You know, you should change "Religion is just a prison, a wall to keep man from his true nature." in your sig to "Religion is being used by many people as an excuse." according to what Bush said.

I should add, you are doing here the same.

I disagree, as I see it, church and state are completely separated, (as are church and religion but thats a different subject)
Wether or not politicians try to use it as a means of gaining points with the people though, might not be.

Bush says he believes in "God", so do alot of politicians, but from how they act it becomes quite apparent that it's just bullshit.

"God told me to strike at the Al-Qaida and I struck them, and then he told me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the middle east.." -George.W.Bush Jr.

Well, what can I say? Bush is a moron, big surprise.


As far as the governmental school system goes I think that they should feature all the major religions in short to give kids an option on what to believe, not favouring any of them, so they have summaries of:
Christianity
Buddhism
Hinduism
Islam
Evolution

And then let the kids decide for themselves which one they find more feasible.

I often hear people saying things along the lines of "Take out "under God" out of the pledge of allegiance? Why, it's not hurting any one!" or "What's wrong with the Ten Commandments in court houses? They're the original rules! This has NOTHING to do with religion!" I often have to think, that's quite fine and all saying this, but your only saying it because you yourself are Christian and these things are positive in your personal agenda. What if it was the Hindu rules put up in court houses? Would you be saying the same things? What if it was "Under Allah" in the pledge of allegiance? I would have to think your opinion would change...

I'd say take out the plege of allegiance.. That's what is truly useless and hurting people.

And the christian and muslim god are the same.

Because religion and most science clash. If they start teaching religion as truth in school, then people will stop looking for the real answers, or at least stop researching certain areas. When I said the downfall of humanity, it was cause.

Actually religion and science doesn't clash at all, most religions and the theory of evolution clash, however the two aren't the same since the theory of evolution is a religion in itself, not science.
Since there's no way to prove it (or any other religion for that matter) you have to believe it's true. (for the time being anyway, never know what will happen in the future)

It's really hard to prove anything these days, you can't really know what happened 500 years ago, and mostly everything before that are speculations and theories.


Getting back on topic, politicians lie so they can fill their wallets, and you should never believe anything that comes out of their mouths.
I personally distance myself from any kind of attempt at organized society since it's doomed to fail, you should try to take care of yourself and do what you want in life, some idiot in a suit that you never met in your life and who doesn't even know you exist couldn't possibly know whats best for you.

Just like I said:

"Religion is being used by many people as an excuse."

My country is like 90% Catholic, but State and Church are VERY separated here. I might be hard to believe, but I cannot remember a politician here mentioning anything about God or Jesus or whatever. =/ Nobody takes religion here into account.

Actually religion and science doesn't clash at all, most religions and the theory of evolution clash, however the two aren't the same since the theory of evolution is a religion in itself, not science.

What the fucking fuck? Have you ever seen bones before? Are you trying to tell me that millions of years worth of bones don't actually prove anything?

Yes, thats exactly what I'm saying.
If you can't prove what, where or when the bones are from then they're completely useless.
And the only way to avoid speculations regarding that is to ask the person who actually made the bone, good lucky with that.

One of mankinds greatest issues is her hubris, that and her constant "need" for dominion, it leaves little room for anything that actually matters, all these scientists in lab coats thinking they actually have a clue about anything whats going on in the world..
They're just dillusional, they don't know anything about the world, they don't even know why they're here, and then they think they can figure out the secrets of the universe and give a detailed description of everything that has ever happened.

I don't buy it.

But I understand why people buy it, they can't stand the thought that they have no idea whats going on, they need to feel like they're in control of at least their own lives, like what they think or do matters and can't simply accept that they are here and thats about all there is to it.
And then we have the people who take this to the extreme, and those are the people who want to control everyone else in a desperate attempt to prove their existance and their abilities to shape their own "destiny".
Those are the saddest people in my opinion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_life

There are many ways to determine the age of bones. And, well, where? Wherever they were found.

And uh, secrets of the universe? You mean like how it started? No one will ever be able to figure that out, no matter what. Really, who cares about that shit anyways? This is about you claiming that something with millions of years of actual solid proof(you know, more than just a book) is "religious" and based only in beliefs.

Carbon-14 dating has already been proven to be inaccurate, people have only been around for so long and the Carbon-14 method is relatively new, theres no way to assert the downfall over such a long time, or if it's even constant.
They assume that it is and then slap a "FACT" label on it like that proves anything.


500 Years ago people knew the sun revolved around the earth, before that they knew that the earth was flat and people also knew that if you were sick it was because your blood was "bad" and had to be drained.
It's stupid to think you know something for sure, people don't know how earth and plants and people came here, and we never will know.

The only thing anyone can ever do is believe that it happened a certain way, and thus, it's all religion.

A film that gives alot of interesting info on this is Jesus Camp, which you can download here:

http://fileho.com/download/2edfce420685/f271fc391618-pmacsusej.abc.html

(rename .abc to .avi after it's done downloading).

Also, try "The Root Of All Evil?" ~ part 1 & part 2

Carbon-14 dating has already been proven to be inaccurate

Post up some plausible sources rather then just blatantly saying things.

They assume that it is and then slap a "FACT" label on it like that proves anything.

Lol. They don't say "it is 3.2 million years old", they say "it is 3.2 million years old according to carbon dating".

500 Years ago people knew the sun revolved around the earth, before that they knew that the earth was flat and people also knew that if you were sick it was because your blood was "bad" and had to be drained.

People also didn't research back then, they used superstition and religion to back their claims.

It's stupid to think you know something for sure, people don't know how earth and plants and people came here, and we never will know.

It's also stupid to give up without trying. We will never know..? Now that's hypocritical, claiming that "It's stupid to think you know something for sure" yet saying that we will never know something? That's certainly setting yourself in cement.

The only thing anyone can ever do is believe that it happened a certain way, and thus, it's all religion.

Do you even know the definition of a religion..? I do, let me dig up some of my families paper work...

"...the criteria of a religion are twofold: first belief in a supernatural being, thing or principle; and second, the acceptance of a canons of conduct in order to give effect to that belief..." That's the definition of a religion.

I'm just facing the facts, humans are dim-witted creatures, every animal knows how to survive, they find food and they build nests, but humans somehow fucked that up too, destroying the only habitable planet in the known universe, we lack the capacity to understand even the simplest things like how not to die.

Do you really think a creature that does something like that is capable of understanding how everything came to be?

People 500 years ago did research things, they didn't have the same technology as now but they did the best with what they had.
And the scientists today use their religion to back their claims aswell.


And I'm not claiming to know anything about how everything came to be, but when I have a choice between believing that some super smart old person on a cloud did it or that everything thats alive and all the different animals and plants and everything in the world was, over billions of years formed out of a wet rock, which itself came from nothing, which suddenly exploded...

I think I find the first choice more believable.

And personally I haven't seen nothing spontaneously blow up lately, have you?

Elegy, you're right up there with landofshadows in how much I admire you.

People 500 years ago thought that what they thought was right - these days we are the same, in the next 500 years people will be saying: "People 500 years ago thought that what they thought was right - these days we are the same, in the next 500 years people will be saying: "People 500 years ago thought that what they thought was right - these days we are the same, in the next 500 years people will be saying: "People 500 years ago thought that what they thought was right - these days we are the same, in the next 500 years people will be saying: "People 500 years ago thought that what they thought was right - these days we are the same, in the next 500 years people will be saying: "People 500 years ago thought that what they thought was right - these days we are the same, in the next 500 years people will be saying: "People 500 years ago thought that what they thought was right - these days we are the same, in the next 500 years people will be saying: "People 500 years ago thought that what they thought was right - these days we are the same, in the next 500 years people will be saying: "People 500 years ago thought that what they thought was right - these days we are the same.

Wow, just wow.

I'm just facing the facts, humans are dim-witted creatures

Compared to what? Other animals?

every animal knows how to survive, they find food and they build nests, but humans somehow fucked that up too,

We did?? Yeh I guess that roof over my head and that pasta I just ate was me fucking up survival. Rephrase your question.

we lack the capacity to understand even the simplest things like how not to die.

Wtf? Are you talking about gaining immortality? If your not, the last time I checked I know I was alive, and so was my neighbor. Animals kill each other too, just on a smaller scale because there's less of them.

Do you really think a creature that does something like that is capable of understanding how everything came to be?

Something like what? I really am quite down on your lack of faith in humanity, which is causing you to attack them without proper cause or real evidence. You sound foolish...

People 500 years ago did research things, they didn't have the same technology as now but they did the best with what they had.

Did you know that when it was introduced that the world was round people where killed for stating that? That doesn't sound like an enlightened people. It sounds like a people ruled by god and superstition, as I said.

And the scientists today use their religion to back their claims aswell.

Perhaps you can give me the name of their "religion"...?

that everything thats alive and all the different animals and plants and everything in the world was, over billions of years formed out of a wet rock, which itself came from nothing, which suddenly exploded...

Again I'm struck with words that really bring me back to your quote of "humans being stupid". Please oh please, study the matter before saying these things...

I think I find the first choice more believable.

And that says more then a lot to me .

And personally I haven't seen nothing spontaneously blow up lately, have you?

I'm not going to explain to you the idea behind the bigbang but NO ONE has claimed that the explosion came from nothing. Your lack of knowledge on this theory shows you shouldn't be speaking on it.



 

It sounds like a people ruled by god and superstition, as I said.

Gods promise eternal life, which is a positive thing. Although Christianity is quite sadistic with the: obey me or burn scenario - but who's to say they were Christian? Sounds like a people not ruled.

Compared to what? Other animals?

I agree on that statement but it's depressing for you to be right about that Saucy...

@Elegy: Are you kidding me? Are you actually saying here you believe the Bible blindly?!

Blizzard, I've never claimed anything like that, for some reason you've decided to assume that I do.
I'm not really sure how you came to that conclusion seeing how I never even used the word "Bible" in any of my posts, nor have I said anything about my personal convictions.


And Saucy, don't take my words out of context and then expect me to make an effort to defend myself against things you practically wrote yourself.
You've probably used the words "jews", "and", "niggers", "hate" and "I" sometime in your life, I could just like you put those together to form a derogatory comment and then accuse you of being racists, thats about as accurate as what you're doing.

I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood something. I was actually refering to this part:

And I'm not claiming to know anything about how everything came to be, but when I have a choice between believing that some super smart old person on a cloud did it or that everything thats alive and all the different animals and plants and everything in the world was, over billions of years formed out of a wet rock, which itself came from nothing, which suddenly exploded...

I think I find the first choice more believable.

And personally I haven't seen nothing spontaneously blow up lately, have you?

I meant: C'mon, you don't really believe God is some old guy sitting on a cloud?! This is one of the many wrong pictures everybody has of God.
Another delusion is thinking that God is male. God is NOT male NOR FEMALE. God is absolute, he can't be categorized within our reality. Most people, even most Christians fail to understand that.
And even though I'm Catholic, I find the second choice more believable. If God has created everything, who told us the way he did? Nobody. So nobody knows HOW God created everything and I would say the second choice would be a more logical explanation. You should know the basics of physics: "Every action will cause a reaction." and "Energy can't disappear or be created, it only changes from one form into another".
So if God made an action, the explosion could have been the reaction. And since God cannot be categorized within our reality, it could easily be that he actually DID create energy.

But I understand why people buy it, they can't stand the thought that they have no idea whats going on, they need to feel like they're in control of at least their own lives, like what they think or do matters and can't simply accept that they are here and thats about all there is to it.
And then we have the people who take this to the extreme, and those are the people who want to control everyone else in a desperate attempt to prove their existance and their abilities to shape their own "destiny".
Those are the saddest people in my opinion.

You're jumping over to philosophy. People tend to quench their thirst for knowledge, but you're saying here they haven't done anything. You are saying people have no idea what's going on. You're saying the entire human knowledge gathered for thousands of years is in vain. I am not putting words in your mouth, you said that, literally:

But I understand why people buy it, they can't stand the thought that they have no idea whats going on, they need to feel like they're in control of at least their own lives, like what they think or do matters

I'm just facing the facts, humans are dim-witted creatures, every animal knows how to survive, they find food and they build nests, but humans somehow fucked that up too, destroying the only habitable planet in the known universe, we lack the capacity to understand even the simplest things like how not to die.

It's the humans intelligence, curiosity and compassion for other humans which destroyed the planet. If we would act like animals, there wouldn't be 6 billion people on Earth now. We would kill each other instead. But then we would be nothing more than animals. But we ARE more than animals.

And I agree with Saucy's post above. You are telling us how people have a need to believe to be in ctontrol and how pathetic it is while you are doing actually the same by telling us how people have no idea what's right, but you do. I ma refering to the part where you describe humans as nothing more than disorientated animals.

Church and State are NOT separated.

The Seperation of Church and State is not even in the Constitution. :/

The Constitution DOES say, however, that the Church and the State should remain institutionally seperate. So the Church doesn't tell the State what to do, and the State doesn't tell the Church what to do.

Unfortunately, the State tells the Church what to do all the time. The reason all Christian schools are private (not-govermentally-funded), is because when the government funds a school, they give it rules to follow. One of which saying people from every religion must be accepted.

Saying, NO, this can not be a purely Christian school. That's telling the Church what to do. It's making rules pertaining to religion.

And Saucy, don't take my words out of context and then expect me to make an effort to defend myself against things you practically wrote yourself.
You've probably used the words "jews", "and", "niggers", "hate" and "I" sometime in your life, I could just like you put those together to form a derogatory comment and then accuse you of being racists, thats about as accurate as what you're doing.

Ahahahahaha.... Really? What I was doing was stapling? If you can't come back to my responses without acting like a child then please don't comment in the first place. I was quoting you, directly, NOT cutting and pasting certain words and mixing them.

Perhaps if your posts are that hard to concept you should learn a bit more about the English language.

Church and State are NOT separated.

I agree with that.

The Constitution DOES say, however, that the Church and the State should remain institutionally seperate.

How do you feel about the ten commandments being in the court houses? Isn't that breaching the constitution..?

Unfortunately, the State tells the Church what to do all the time.

While the church may have no direct manipulation on face value, your current leading is starting wars in the name of Yahweh ( or so he says ), if that's not in some way direction from church to state, or perhaps religion rulings, then I truly don't see what the starting definition would be.

The Constitution DOES say, however, that the Church and the State should remain institutionally seperate.

How do you feel about the ten commandments being in the court houses? Isn't that breaching the constitution..?

Unfortunately, the State tells the Church what to do all the time.

While the church may have no direct manipulation on face value, your current leading is starting wars in the name of Yahweh ( or so he says ), if that's not in some way direction from church to state, or perhaps religion rulings, then I truly don't see what the starting definition would be.

@1st - I would say that the Constitution merely says that the Church can't make rules governing State, and the State can't make rules governing the Church. This is not to say there can be NO religion in the State. Or no State in the Relgion. (I'm curious as to how THAT'D work out xD lol)

@2nd - It is not Christianity that is starting these wars. These "Holy Wars" for Yahweh are created by raticals and will continue till the end of time due to religious unrest between Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Unfortunately. I'm not saying Religion has no influence on State and vice-versa (as I've said), but neither are making official rules GOVERNING the other.

Saying, NO, this can not be a purely Christian school. That's telling the Church what to do. It's making rules pertaining to religion.

What? How is this ordering the church around? It's not, it's saying 'You have the freedom to educate in a Christian way if you please, but not with our money.' The state funds secular schools, religious people and institutions religious ones.

This is not to say there can be NO religion in the State.

The government is a secular institution, and isn't supposed to have religion in it. The Ten Commadments in the courthouse is rather annoying, but it's really a trivial matter when it comes down to it.

@2nd - It is not Christianity that is starting these wars. These "Holy Wars" for Yahweh are created by raticals and will continue till the end of time due to religious unrest between Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Unfortunately. I'm not saying Religion has no influence on State and vice-versa (as I've said), but neither are making official rules GOVERNING the other.

Unless shit really hits the fan and the world ends within the next millennia or so, I really don't think Judaism, Christianity, or Islam will last until the world's end.

While the church may have no direct manipulation on face value, your current leading is starting wars in the name of Yahweh ( or so he says ), if that's not in some way direction from church to state, or perhaps religion rulings, then I truly don't see what the starting definition would be.

Don't you understand he only says that to gain support amongst the Christian majority? Religion is, always has been, and always will be a useful tool for gaining support, money, etc. Iraq and Afghanistan aren't holy crusades by any means.

Saying, NO, this can not be a purely Christian school. That's telling the Church what to do. It's making rules pertaining to religion.

What? How is this ordering the church around? It's not, it's saying 'You have the freedom to educate in a Christian way if you please, but not with our money.' The state funds secular schools, religious people and institutions religious ones.

This is not to say there can be NO religion in the State.

The government is a secular institution, and isn't supposed to have religion in it. The Ten Commadments in the courthouse is rather annoying, but it's really a trivial matter when it comes down to it.

@1st - It's saying that if you accept our money you CAN NOT be a Christian school. I know this is a minor example. Another example.
You can't publically display a Nativity Scene, unless you have things pertaining to other holidays put up. But of course you're allowed to publically display any of the other things by themselves. Once again, I know this is a minor example, but it should get the point across.

@2nd - Where in the constituion does it say there can be NO religion in state?